Implications from propositions A => B, A <=> C and C => B

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter x-is-y
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the logical implications and equivalences between three propositions A, B, and C, specifically exploring the relationships A => B, A <=> C, and C => B. Participants are examining the validity of these implications and the conditions under which they hold, as well as the broader concept of logical equivalence.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the propositions A, B, and C and notes that the key indicates A => B, A <=> C, and C => B, expressing uncertainty about the implications.
  • Another participant explains that proving equivalence among propositions typically requires demonstrating A <=> B, B <=> C, and A <=> C, and suggests that proving A => B, B => C, and C => A could suffice for establishing equivalence.
  • A different participant challenges the assertion that the key's implications are sufficient, arguing that B => A is not implied by the given premises.
  • Another participant expresses confusion about the task of listing all possibilities for the implications and questions the relevance of the initial statement regarding propositions implying themselves.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the sufficiency of the implications provided in the key. There is no consensus on whether the implications A => B, A <=> C, and C => B are adequate for establishing the equivalence of the propositions.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the formulation of the question and the implications involved, indicating potential limitations in understanding the logical relationships and the requirements for proving equivalence.

x-is-y
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I'm not 100% sure what this is in English so I'll try to describe it. Gives that:

A: x^2 < 16
B: -4 < x
C: -4 < x < 4

I'm supposed to put out every possibility for => and <=> between A,B and C. The key says that A => B, A <=> C and C => B. I can understand this, but isn't it true for every proposition (I think that it's called this) that A <=> A. That is, every proposition implies itself?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Suppose you have three propositions, A, B and C and want to prove that they are equivalent. That means that
A <=> B, B <=> C and A <=> C
which can also be written as
A => B, B => A, A => C, C => A, B => C, C => B.
In words: if you know that one of them is true/false, they must all be true/false.
Obviously, A <=> A is always true and it's not included in the list.

You can prove all 6 of them consecutively, but that would be a lot of work. Therefore we find a shortcut:
suppose you would be able to prove half of them, namely that A => B, B => C and C => A.
Then because B implies C and C implies A, B also implies A so you automatically get B => A and therefore A <=> B.
Similarly, C => A and A => B so C also implies B (via A) hence B <=> C.
So proving these three statements will prove all six of them.

This is what the key suggests. It is wrong though, in claiming that A => B, A <=> C and C => B suffices. For example, you cannot get B => A (there is no premise starting with B).
 
I think you misunderstood the question. Nothing was said about A<=>B, B<=>C, C<=>A. there is nothing here that implies B=> A and the answer key does NOT suggest such a thing.
 
x-is-y said:
I'm supposed to put out every possibility for => and <=> between A,B and C. The key says that A => B, A <=> C and C => B.
Probably then I got confused by the formulation.
What is meant by "put out every possbility"?
And I don't think I see the relevance of the question in the first part of the post to the question "isn't it true for every proposition ...".

So I apologize if I mislead you x-is-y, perhaps you can try to rephrase the question (or if someone else understands it, explain it to my numb mind)?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K